The following scenario is possible with the current cpuidle code and
the ACPI cpuidle driver:
(1) acpi_processor_cst_has_changed() is called,
(2) cpuidle_disable_device() is called,
(3) cpuidle_remove_state_sysfs() is called to remove the (presumably
outdated) states info from sysfs,
(3) acpi_processor_get_power_info() is called, the first entry in the
pr->power.states[] table is filled with zeros,
(4) acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle() is called and it doesn't fill the
first entry in pr->power.states[],
(5) cpuidle_enable_device() is called,
(6) __cpuidle_register_device() is _not_ called, since the device has
already been registered,
(7) Consequently, poll_idle_init() is _not_ called either,
(8) cpuidle_add_state_sysfs() is called to create the sysfs attributes
for the new states and it uses the bogus first table entry from
acpi_processor_get_power_info() for creating state0.

This problem is avoided if cpuidle_enable_device()
unconditionally calls poll_idle_init().